Author
Topic: Really?Seriously? (Read 2179 times)

I just read an article (see below link) where a Republic Congressman is proposing a bill to provide a $3500 tax deduction for vet expenses. While I do like this idea I think there is something seriously wrong (and hypocritical) when the sponsor refuses to work to resolve a HUMAN Healthcare bill.

They talked about this on the radio last week. I'm on the fence about it. While I could certainly use the deduction, there was a lot of talk going on about people rushing out to shelters (most who should not have pets period) and getting a dog or a cat, just so they can get the credit from vet bills. While I can see getting an animal out of the shelter to be a good thing, what about the "real" care of these dogs? People that shouldn't have dogs, getting them for the wrong reasons, leaving them tied outside, not being able to feed them (or just not doing it right). These pets get a chance to get out of the shelter, but do you end up with greedy people who just go get the dog for the "break" and then not take care of it otherwise? Or what about the people who just rush out to the pet store and are supporting puppy mills and byb's, thus increasing the support and money they put in their pockets, creating even more of a "supply and demand."

I just think they need to put stipulations on it. Which maybe by now, since I first heard about this last week, maybe they have added some "rules" to it. But I just seeing it being a double-edge sword. Trust me, I could use it....but then again....are there bigger fish to fry (ie. Human Healthcare...and what about the HSUS doing a better job at stopping kill shelters, etc)

Like I said...I do like the idea of the deduction but having spent a summer without health insurance and getting so sick I had to go to the ER (and walked out with a $3700 bill)...I would rather this Congressman put his efforts a Healthcare plan that covers all humans. I think humans would be able to better afford to take care of their pets if they didnt need to sell their first born child to a health insurance company (I am currently on Bob's insurance and we dont have to pay a preimum but if I opted into the insurance at my job I'd pay 25% of the cost which is nearly 12K a year)

They talked about this on the radio last week. I'm on the fence about it. While I could certainly use the deduction, there was a lot of talk going on about people rushing out to shelters (most who should not have pets period) and getting a dog or a cat, just so they can get the credit from vet bills. While I can see getting an animal out of the shelter to be a good thing, what about the "real" care of these dogs?

I still see no problem with this. They have to take them into the vet to get the deduction. . . Which implies that they're going to provide adequate care. Sorry, but even in the worst situations, I see no problem with an altered animal living life on a chain versus dead in a shelter. At least the dog is healthy, has seen the vet and is altered.